If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

one man's opinion decimate your fun with photography, okay? It is my opinion of how it is impacting MY photography and the last time I checked, it was my finger on the shutter release, making the determination of what gets taken... and what doesn't.

Hey, I do not want to rain on anyone's parade. My goodness, if the SONY "herd" wants this, then feast away!

I suppose that by using "herd" to describe we Sony users is a bit of a derogatory term intended to imply that we can only follow rather than make our own decisions. I'll simply point out that you are joining a larger "herd" and note that this is a complete reversal of your earlier opinions.

Originally Posted by DonSchap

Personally, I have been shooting far too long and, yes, I have, first hand, experienced the SLT-a77 and NEX7 "drawbacks," right at the WPPI Trade Show, using them on the most elegant lenses ever produced. I know this is not the direction I want my photography to run in. Sure, the bells and whistles gadgetry have an allure... but, I have not been conditioned or manipulated by P&S technology... and my expectations are definitely a lot different when I pull that shutter release, as I truly "witness" what it is I want to capture.

Yep, you've had half an hour or so with two cameras that take quite a bit of rethinking to get the best out and you've made a snap decision (pun intended, sorry). On the other hand, I purchased an A77 last September, not because I want to go back to APS-C but because I wanted to see if I would be happy to transition to the A99 when it comes so any conclusions I reach are based on prolonged use of the actual technology.

I should also point out that I have the A900 and a previous 25 years experience with the next best thing, the Minolta 9000 so I do think my opinion counts for something even if it is diametrically opposed to yours.

Originally Posted by DonSchap

Despite that, the "never-going-to-be-made" a9xx DSLR... STILL would not be the "be all, end all" camera I really want to see and use. Sadly, it would have been the "natural" progression of the 36MP sensor, just like the Nikon D800 is, in my opinion. The SONY SLT-a99 is a clear departure from that. It is a little computer screen that you are viewing, not nature.

You're right that the A99 will be a departure from an OVF 9 series camera but that's the point, is it not? Sony are going in a different direction with SLT, the intention being to steal a march on the competition; remember that SLT is a transitional technology between DSLR and the mirrorless future. You're also correct that the EVF is a little computer screen and again, that's the whole point is it not? The EVF gives a better representation of the final image which pretty well eliminates the need for "chimping" unlike the real world view in the OVF which can be misleading.

Originally Posted by DonSchap

Enjoy your newest digital cameras, folks. They are more so, now, than ever before. Next, you'll be telling me how the camera (by itself) took a trip, somewhere, and you were able to capture images from the comfort of your computer laptop. Yeah, that's experiencing the "moment of creativity." You know something, been there, already... and done that.

You know what, that's claptrap and what's more it's patronising claptrap. By all means, tell me that EVF is not for you, I can understand that, I can even sympathise to a degree but don't tell me that creativity is the sole domain of the OVF user, that says more about you than it does about creativity.

Right now, you're just lashing blindly about because Sony are not marching to your tune. Just to take a few things you've said in the preceding pages.

"Stabilization is not as critical as it once was, with the higher ISO now in place"
So that's why CaNikon have stopped putting stabilisation into their lenses? No, of course not and it's still true that the lower the ISO, the better the IQ and that's not about to change any time soon.

In the Nikon D800, like the new SLT-a99, they both use the new SONY 36MP sensor.
Since when? We don't know what sensor will be in the A99 though the latest rumour says it will be 24MP.

but considering how bizarre, complicated and effectively unusable the new SLT-a77 and NEX-7 menus are tending to be...
Unbelievable! You've clearly not properly evaluated either camera. Your comments are so far from the truth that they are, quite simply, a joke.

Minolta abandoned the ISO-hot shoe... which led to a lot of people fleeing the brand. That was not good and probably began the path to bankruptcy.
Complete nonsense, of course. No one abandoned Minolta because they canned the ISO hot shoe in favour of one that supported extras like TTL functions and the like. Some folks didn't like that there was no backward compatability without an adapter but mass exodus, I think not.

With SONY incestuously providing the sensor to the Nikon... the connection for collaboration already exists! It is only the continual rape of the customer that prohibits the production of a unified RF-solution. Incestuous?? Sony sells Sensors, that's sound business sense and what it has to do with "a unified RF-solution" escapes me. If you want RF, there are third party solutions that work. It may come to a camera body at some point but I can tell you it won't be "unified".

I do not envision SONY ever running up to my door and saying, "Geez, Don... we screwed up. You had it right on the button,
At last something we can agree on; you won't be getting that knock on the door.

Look Don, I don't have an axe to grind here. It matters not whether you move to Nikon, Canon or wherever else you're happy, what matters to me is whether Sony are providing the tools which make it easier for me to acquire the shots that please me. Right now, I'm in a good place with SLT and NEX and see no reason why Sony will not continue to bring improvements and enhancements to the table.

That doesn't invalidate the opinion of many users who feel that the EVF is not for them; there again, an awful lot of folk said something similar when Minolta introduced AF back in '86 and an awful lot of folk subsequently changed their mind. Whether the same thing happens again I can't say for sure but I do suspect that the EVF is here to stay and the future is in EVIL cameras not the DSLR.

The EVF is not better than the OVF in all respects but is a lot better in some, so it's a question of weighing up the pros and cons and, of course, there are improvements to come and you can't do that without getting to market and using profits to pay for more development.

If you want a reasoned discussion about the merits/demerits of the system, I'm up for that, why not? Start by telling me how the EVF prevents me, or makes it harder to take an image that I might take with my A900 or you with your A850. And don't just tell me that the OVF view looks better, that's not in question and simply voices a preference.

Don,
Weren't you just a few months ago going on about how great Sony was when they released the a77? How they "finally listened to you"? You couldn't wait until the a99 was released? What gives now?
You know what? Nobody's going to take your camera and lenses away. Can you just concentrate on creating quality images, and forget the gear?

I do remember, though, you were quite dismissive of me when I switched from Sony to Nikon over 2 years ago, even though I was clear that it was a good decision for me, not anyone else. I saw a better fit and future for me with Nikon. Truth be told I almost went the Canon way (and I stated that too), and my images wouldn't be a bit different today really. I could have the best gear in the world and my images would not be anywhere near as good as some of the folks who post here. I hate to mention him again, but I wish my images were half as good as @TheWengler's back when he was shooting with his Pentax and single lens...

Don ain't switching anyway. He's just blowing off steam and having a rant cos he's frustrated.

As i stated before, RF will almost certainly be a thing of the future but it is hardly necessary. If you shoot indoors IR is very effective, its when you shoot outdoors that it really falls over. I also find it amusing that the talk is about pros wanting this RF TTL solution when in fact the vast majority of pros use manual flash cos they want total control over light. TTL is only really great when the conditions don't change at all. If you have the subject moving or transitory light, then TTL is immensely frustrating cos, by its very design, it changes exposure based on the inputs.

Why would anyone want to pay $500 per flash just to have rf capability when they can get a perfectly capable flash like an sb28 for $120 ? I bought 4 mint sb28's, 2 of them were even boxed, a year or so ago for $450 shipped from adorama. I use them with the very cheap and totally reliable cyber sync system and they work perfect. Don't get me wrong, I love TTL flash and would love a rf TTL solution and have the option of using it in camera without any other gizmos to attach to the camera but really, am is prepared to pay $2000 for the flash upgrades ? No, sorry, no sale. It's just not a viable alternative for 99% of the population. and bodies which I'm very liberal with my use of the sb28's in comparison to me sb900 cos they are cheap.

Steamed!

In the Nikon D800, like the new SLT-a99, they both use the new SONY 36MP sensor.
Since when? We don't know what sensor will be in the A99 though the latest rumour says it will be 24MP.

I suggest that the 36MP Sensor would have been the solution in a "mythical" a9xx camera. Using a 24MP would seem "controversial," because the a900/a850 ALREADY use a 24MP sensor. Oh, you could try to argue it, but from a marketing prospective... it would be a mess. Would the a9xx ever have done movies? I suppose it would have probably been similar to the way the now defunct a580 does it.

I am just amazed at this route, overall. The Full Frame users are not the average APS-C users. Can we agree on that? These are people expecting a different level of performance and, specifically, increased "attention" to the performance from their camera. That's precisely WHY they spent the extra bucks to get it. It is a move to improve.

If all I can expect from a 24MPSLT-a99 is just a larger image circle than I get on a 24MPSLT-a77... well, I think you can see the conundrum. Why spend a $1000 more in cash? Just back up a few feet and use the money you saved for a new lens.

Originally Posted by Rooz

Don ain't switching anyway. He's just blowing off steam and having a rant cos he's frustrated.

Going to Nikon is a tragedy, in my book. Again, they still are not delivering the package I and others want to see in their rig, no matter who makes it. If it seems that I am flaming everyone... I suppose I am. Three rounds of cameras, dog gone it, and still, the most important change I can imagine in this day and age... and no one is doing it, EXCEPT third party... and even that remains half-assed, because the main manufacturers will not combine on their (wireless) ratio flash control.
@the Photography Equipment User

If the main manufacturers are not going to consolidate, then each respective company need to provide the direct-flash control through Radio Frequency (RF) in-the-camera-body, in order to make use of ratio control and timing elements currently provided through Infrared signal from the hot-shoe attached flash unit.

I suggest you quit saying "no." You are just allowing these manufacturers of the hook force you to continue to use something that is fallible and limited, you short-sighted users. You are only screwing yourself out of a very important control point in your photography. Believe me, I have experienced it. Others have, too. Get behind this "improvement movement." A well-thought out solution would effectively cost you nothing to make this change. It would be spread across every new camera body and new flash added. RF-to-IF Adapters could be supplied for the older generations.

I mean, c'mon... you're arguing NOT to have a solid and reliable capability? This just has to be a bad dream... what happened to intelligent people? Think it through and stop this. Infrared is limited and inferior solution. Open your eyes!

SONY has been a slippery slope for me, because they have zigged when I was looking for a zag. It leads to a lot of ill-will... and the worst part, there is no one that is available to discuss this with. The secrecy level is beyond belief and it leads to exactly what is happening, now. No one has had a very clear answer to plan with. I mean, that is painful when you are trying to run a business, much less a hobby. I suppose remaining flexible and patiently waiting is the common advice. We have waited seven years. Even breaking a mirror has a statute of limitation.

Well, it looks like SONY finally broke the mirror.

Last edited by DonSchap; 03-13-2012 at 06:32 PM.

Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography A Photographer Is ForeverLook, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.flickr® & Sdi

I suggest that the 36MP Sensor would have been the solution in a "mythical" a9xx camera. Using a 24MP would seem "controversial," because the a900/a850 ALREADY use a 24MP sensor. Oh, you could try to argue it, but from a marketing prospective... it would be a mess. Would the a9xx ever have done movies? I suppose it would have probably been similar to the way the now defunct a580 does it.

I am just amazed at this route, overall. The Full Frame users are not the average APS-C users. Can we agree on that? These are people expecting a different level of performance and, specifically, increased "attention" to the performance from their camera. That's precisely WHY they spent the extra bucks to get it. It is a move to improve.

If all I can expect from a 24MPSLT-a99 is just a larger image circle than I get on a 24MPSLT-a77... well, I think you can see the conundrum. Why spend a $1000 more in cash? Just back up a few feet and use the money you saved for a new lens.

Going to Nikon is a tragedy, in my book. Again, they still are not delivering the package I and others want to see in their rig, no matter who makes it. If it seems that I am flaming everyone... I suppose I am. Three rounds of cameras, dog gone it, and still, the most important change I can imagine in this day and age... and no one is doing it, EXCEPT third party... and even that remains half-assed, because the main manufacturers will not combine on their (wireless) ratio flash control.
@the Photography Equipment User

If the main manufacturers are not going to consolidate, then each respective company need to provide the direct-flash control through Radio Frequency (RF) in-the-camera-body, in order to make use of ratio control and timing elements currently provided through Infrared signal from the hot-shoe attached flash unit.

I suggest you quit saying "no." You are just allowing these manufacturers of the hook force you to continue to use something that is fallible and limited, you short-sighted users. You are only screwing yourself out of a very important control point in your photography. Believe me, I have experienced it. Others have, too. Get behind this "improvement movement." A well-thought out solution would effectively cost you nothing to make this change. It would be spread across every new camera body and new flash added. RF-to-IF Adapters could be supplied for the older generations.

I mean, c'mon... you're arguing NOT to have a solid and reliable capability? This just has to be a bad dream... what happened to intelligent people? Think it through and stop this. Infrared is limited and inferior solution. Open your eyes!

SONY has been a slippery slope for me, because they have zigged when I was looking for a zag. It leads to a lot of ill-will... and the worst part, there is no one that is available to discuss this with. The secrecy level is beyond belief and it leads to exactly what is happening, now. No one has had a very clear answer to plan with. I mean, that is painful when you are trying to run a business, much less a hobby. I suppose remaining flexible and patiently waiting is the common advice. We have waited seven years. Even breaking a mirror has a statute of limitation.

Well, it looks like SONY finally broke the mirror.

The fact that no one is offering what you want is probably a better indicator of you than of them don't you think ? Some introspection is needed I would suggest.

RF is the most important change in this day and age ? lol hardly so. It's a nice feature is all it is. Just like In body IS was a nice feature. The most important changes in photography are image quality, image quality, image quality. And in that order. That may be in the form of low light, dynamic range, colour accuracy, skin tones, etc. Then, they have to consider things like AF, metering, functionality, ergonomics etc. All of these evolutionary things are implicitly important in photograph. RF rates a pretty distant place way after that for many reasons, most of which I have explained twice now and you haven't acknowledged.

Control... you must have control

I'm sorry, Rooz, but control of light is the most important aspect to any photography. If I have learned anything, that would be the #1 point in fact. If you use Mommy Nature, then you usually need reflectors to assist you. But, if you go indoors... then the fun begins. YOU are the photographer, my friend, your job is to properly manage and manipulate your lighting.

Photography = Drawing with LIGHT!

The only introspection I feel is needed is what it would take to get these deadhead engineers to finally offer up the control features for modern photography to these cameras. Infrared (IF) control should have been relegated to the history books, eight years ago. It is simply wasting a photographer's time to continue deploying IF in camera systems.

I suggest we all work on getting this aspect going with all the major manufacturers working for "we the people" who use these tools.

Image quality is what it is, out of these cameras. Depending on which sensor and lens you feed that sensor with usually determines most of Image Quality, more like the "flavor of the month" club. The user picks and chooses how to do it. Cheap glass, cheap cameras... cheapen the result.

The relationship between triggering your flash system should be:

Reliable

capable of significant distance between camera and flash head

Interference-proof

Control cannot be optically blocked

Easily implemented (meaning, you don't have to think about it much... to cover the dunderhead users who buy advanced equipment)

Standardized (so that it works uniformly with all manufactured cameras)

Again, this should be across the board in all cameras and as standard as would be feasible. If someone wants to deviate from that, so be it... but the standard should be strong enough to stand on its own. Focus on standardizing control... and allow people to save a dime, will ya? Those are some deep pockets you have got there, mate.

If yoiu want to call this "low hanging fruit" in the industry, I am good with that. But, let's get it done, once and for all. It is obscene to think that this kind of technological nonsense is still going on.

"Pull the RF-trigger and make IF history... starting today!"

or

"Infrared... you're supposed to be dead!"

Last edited by DonSchap; 03-13-2012 at 10:40 PM.

Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography A Photographer Is ForeverLook, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.flickr® & Sdi

Stabilization was never a sell for me..in fact having a sensor dangling inside never assured me of anything..i have thought many times of snipping the wires and epoxying the damn thing in place......and lack of manual control on lenses is a pain....i love the zeiss glass though...the older minolta lenses are pretty much a ca nightmare...

The a55 was a flop for general use for me...it has found a permanent home on my macro rig though..the real time live view work great for that

I'm sorry, Rooz, but control of light is the most important aspect to any photography. If I have learned anything, that would be the #1 point in fact. If you use Mommy Nature, then you usually need reflectors to assist you. But, if you go indoors... then the fun begins. YOU are the photographer, my friend, your job is to properly manage and manipulate your lighting.

Photography = Drawing with LIGHT!

The only introspection I feel is needed is what it would take to get these deadhead engineers to finally offer up the control features for modern photography to these cameras. Infrared (IF) control should have been relegated to the history books, eight years ago. It is simply wasting a photographer's time to continue deploying IF in camera systems.

I suggest we all work on getting this aspect going with all the major manufacturers working for "we the people" who use these tools.

Image quality is what it is, out of these cameras. Depending on which sensor and lens you feed that sensor with usually determines most of Image Quality, more like the "flavor of the month" club. The user picks and chooses how to do it. Cheap glass, cheap cameras... cheapen the result.

The relationship between triggering your flash system should be:

Reliable

capable of significant distance between camera and flash head

Interference-proof

Control cannot be optically blocked

Easily implemented (meaning, you don't have to think about it much... to cover the dunderhead users who buy advanced equipment)

Standardized (so that it works uniformly with all manufactured cameras)

Again, this should be across the board in all cameras and as standard as would be feasible. If someone wants to deviate from that, so be it... but the standard should be strong enough to stand on its own. Focus on standardizing control... and allow people to save a dime, will ya? Those are some deep pockets you have got there, mate.

If yoiu want to call this "low hanging fruit" in the industry, I am good with that. But, let's get it done, once and for all. It is obscene to think that this kind of technological nonsense is still going on.

"Pull the RF-trigger and make IF history... starting today!"

or

"Infrared... you're supposed to be dead!"

how did any of this address a single point we have been discussing ? lol